Board Prohibits In-law Apartments

Separate Utilities, Entrances Now Banned At Single-family Lots

August 21, 2007|By LYNN DOAN; Courant Staff Writer

SUFFIELD — The zoning and planning commission voted Monday to prohibit the construction of in-law apartments in response to complaints that property owners have been renting them out as single-family homes.

A new provision in the town's zoning and planning regulations will prohibit the addition of apartments with separate utilities and entrances on single-family lots beginning next month. The regulations will continue to allow residents to add rooms and kitchens for relatives, as long as the additions remain an ``integral'' part of the existing home and share utilities.

``We still do a very admirable job as far as allowing people to accommodate their relatives,'' said Jim Taylor, the town's zoning enforcement officer.

In-law apartments, also called accessory apartments, are commonly built as separate living quarters. The Central Connecticut Regional Planning Agency and Capitol Region Council of Governments have supported the apartments as an affordable method of keeping families together.

But as properties are sold, Taylor said, the apartments often become rental homes, prompting complaints from neighbors and creating an enforcement issue for the town.

Years ago, the town provided a special permit process that allowed residents to build in-law apartments. But once zoning officials noticed that the apartments were being rented out, they did away with the special permit and now generally grant building permits only for additions that share the same utilities and entrances as the existing home, Taylor said.

``We're just articulating what the intent has always been,'' said J. Scott Guilmartin, chairman of the zoning and planning commission.

The commission also unanimously denied a permit to developer Blue Sky Builders to build a seven-lot subdivision on Newgate Road. By turning down an agreement with Connecticut Light & Power Co. last month, the board of selectmen thwarted the developer's plans to build a roadway integral to the subdivision.

Guilmartin said Monday that the commission could not approve permits for the subdivision without the roadway. The commission also cited concerns with the project's proposed open space, emergency access to the homes and the design of its driveways.